Legal Opinion
Moore v. Shaw
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 26, 2004No. B161230PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KLEIN, P. J.
Defendants and appellants Nancy A. Shaw (Nancy Shaw) and Reay and Shaw (collectively, Nancy Shaw) appeal an order denying their anti-SLAPP 1 motion wherein they sought to strike the first amended petition of plaintiff and appellant Kenton E. Moore (Kenton) 2 requesting an order directing Nancy Shaw to pay damages. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16.) 3
Kenton cross-appeals the order insofar as it denied his request for attorney fees.
The issues presented include whether Kenton’s action was subject to an anti-SLAPP motion, and if so, whether Kenton met his burden of establishing a…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Ketchum v. MosesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- City of Cotati v. CashmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Peregrine Funding, Inc. v. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- People v. SpectorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Thomas v. QuinteroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Grewal v. JammuCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Graffiti Protective Coatings, Inc. v. City of Pico RiveraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.